|
[Sponsors] | |||||
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 129
Rep Power: 6 ![]() |
All would like to know if anyone did compare results between Default f-packing vs Reduce surface breakup in extreme cases? Is the 2nd option run slower due to additional surface treatment needed to prevent breakup of fluid?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Senior Member
michael barkhudarov
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 317
Rep Power: 7 ![]() |
The difference in speed between different F-packing options is minimal. I doubt it will even be noticeable. The difference in the results depends on the type of problem and in many case is also minimal. I would recommend sticking to the default setting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 129
Rep Power: 6 ![]() |
Hi Michael, thanks for clarification.
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Compile problem | ivanyao | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 1 | October 12, 2012 09:31 |
| BlockMesh FOAM warning | gaottino | OpenFOAM Native Meshers: blockMesh | 7 | July 19, 2010 14:11 |
| latest OpenFOAM-1.6.x from git failed to compile | phsieh2005 | OpenFOAM Bugs | 25 | February 9, 2010 04:37 |
| Error with Wmake | skabilan | OpenFOAM Installation | 3 | July 28, 2009 00:35 |
| Axisymmetrical mesh | Rasmus Gjesing (Gjesing) | OpenFOAM Native Meshers: blockMesh | 10 | April 2, 2007 14:00 |